Clinton to end candidacy and announce she is supporting Obama for president
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
N Korea stages mass military parade for late leader
( 9 )
-
Maid kills Singaporean widow after being called stupid
( 4 )
-
At least 356 killed in Honduras prison fire
( 3 )
-
Republicans oppose any cuts in nuclear weapons
( 28 )
-
Russia: West 'slammed door' on Syria at U.N.
( 12 )
-
- Financial Advisor
- Select Asset Management KK, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥100,000 ~ ¥999,999 Paid Training Commission Based
-
- Corporate Business English Trainers
- ACT Systems, Inc.（株式会社アクト・システムズ）, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥269,500 ~ ¥280,000 / Month
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
Order by Time Order by Popularity
34 Comments
Login to comment
0
presto345
Charismatic newcomer: On stage, yes. He'll have to prove himself now.
a compelling message of change: Hasn't every political candidate over used this word CHANGE? Sounds very vague to me. Promises, hype, promises.
0
plasticmonkey
ding dong the wicked witch is dead!
0
usaexpat
Well there's alway 2012 as McCain has said he's only planning to serve 1 term.
0
Everton2
McCain is the classic bore. Listening to his speeches is akin to watching paint dry. And that dirty old man's grin of his make you want to keep him well away from your children. Yesterdays hero without a doubt, from the Jurassic
0
Everton2
usaexpat McCain will not serve two minutes as President . The world has moved on and so as the majority of those who will decide this race. It is a choice between the old perspective with a narrow vision of the world conjuring up enemies around every corner to be threatened into submission, against an inclusive approach that promotes a willingness to try different approaches to a long list of intractable challenges.
0
usaexpat
I think I prefer the old way of projecting power both soft and hard. America without it's hardline posture would be swallowed up by any number of its enemies. The Bush doctrine of preemption is really where America has gone off the rails. I don't think anything constructive can come for engaging Iran or any of the other enemy nations Obama has said he would sit down and talk with. We prtty much know what Iran's goals are, I doubt talking to them is going to suddenly convince them that Israel has a right to exist.
0
RomeoRamenII
Everton2 - You may come from a country that has already bowed to your Islamic masters' feet, but for Americans the choice is between protecting our national security versus surrendering and, to use one of obama's catch phrases, "hope" the Islamoterroists will throw their weapons down and just leave us alone.
RR
0
Alphaape
Of all this talk that Obama has said that he would sit down with the US enemies. Well, I heard him claify this somewhat. He says that he would sit with Akmaden (the Iranian guy) but do so from a position of power, in other words, not go there with an open arm but go there saying that we have the military might and are not afraid to use it. Where have I heard that before? Seems to me a little "W-esque" to me. So what we will get, is a guy that will meet with Iran, and tell them act up or the US will show military might, and we will be back in the same place again. If you don't believe me, just do a google of some of his speeches and interviews and you would probably come up with the same conclusion.
Just for those who may not know, but in the 20th century, when America was at war, there was a Democrat in the office: WW1: Wilson; WW2: FDR/Truman; Korea: Truman (yes Ike was in office when the cease fire was signed); Vietnam: Kennedy first sent special forces in '62, LBJ had the troop build up, Nixon ended it. Yes Bush I was in office when Iraq invaded Kuwait, and we went to war, and Bush II did start back up the same war again. So this notion that the Democrats are the party of piece is not really true.
I know that in the cases I mentioned, other outside factors led us into getting into wars, but just wanted to put that out there.
0
WhiteHawk
Everton2:
Oh my. First, our enemies don't "conjure up" themselves. Our current enemies don't hate us because of our policies, or even because of our freedom; they hate us because we exist.
Second, what inclusive approach?!? McCain has a history of working with democrats and foreign leaders (not always to our country's benefit, admittedly), while Obama has the most partisan voting record in the Senate. And I don't know if you're aware of his private life, but his mentors, professors and even his church leaders are a collection of narrow-visioned extremists whose idea of "inclusion" means you have to change your ideals to match theirs.
Look past the marketing and the campaign promises. Don't be afraid to see the man for who and what his really is. I won't call you a racist if you do. Only superficial political hacks would think of suggest that.
As for Clinton, she's known for her tenacity and certainly lived up to it in this campaign. If she would just use her powers for good instead of insecurity-fueled Marxism, she might actually deserve to lead a country.
0
USAFdude
Looking quite forward to President of the United States Barack Obama's inauguration speech in January, 2009!
Hope at last!
0
WhiteHawk
Hope for what, specifically?
0
Badsey
Hillary may test the independent waters and see if it brings her more money. If she gives up now, she knows her chances will be worse in 8 yrs.
It's now or never for her and their are more women voters than men. =she should have easily won this but screwed up royally.
0
Badsey
if Hillary doesn't get VP -I believe she will go for it.
0
adaydream
Hillary isn't going to test the independent waters. She's going to do whatever is required to get a democrat in the Whitehouse.
She won't get the VP slot. It kinda defeats the "Change" platform. < :-)
0
USAFdude
Whitehawk - we hope for a winning strategy for the US in the war on terror. I believe Obama is the best candidate to bring this about.
0
WhiteHawk
USAFdude, what is Obama's winning strategy for the US in the war on terror?
0
Sarge
Whitehawk - Obama's winning strategy for the U.S. in the war on terror:
Negotiate with our implacable enemies without pre-conditions, whilst immediately withdrawing our troops from Iraq without regard to conditions on the ground.
0
adaydream
First part of Obama's foreign strategy is not to start a war just to be the war president.
Second part is not to fabricate evidence to attack a virtually defenseless country.
Third part is not to drag the country into a war based on lies.
george bush and John McCain's eagerness to continue bush's policies will help Obama win the election.
Hillary will be out there getting the democratic vote. She'll be throwing her delegates and popular following to Obama. < :-)
0
WhiteHawk
Now adaydream, did you really think that was going to be a convincing argument?
So you really think the Bush administration invaded Afghanistan and targeted OBL and the Taliban for no reason whatsoever? Really? What's that? You were so obsessed with Iraq that you forgot about Afghanistan?
Defenseless? That must be why our troops were back home in 100 days.
I've asked this before, but what did the Bush administration say about Iraq that was different from what Clinton, Gore, Kennedy, etc., said about Iraq prior to 2001?
Only because most of Obama's supporters are too young and/or uneducated to realize that he will continue Jimmy Carter's policies.
0
Alphaape
whitehawk
There are a lot of things that get mis-reported on the war. I am not totally on the "Bush Bandwagon" and I admit he has made numerous mistakes. But I don't think Obama will be any better. I remeber 8 years ago, the talk was that Bush was too inexperienced to be President. Well, comparing the records of Obama and McCain, Obama is woefully inexperienced.
Also, if you know anything about American politics, Obama is coming from the Chicago democratic machine, one of the most corrupt political machines in the nation. Remember this, of two former governors of Illinois who were from this background, one is in prison for corruption charges, and the other is on his way.
0
Everton2
RomeoRamenII wrote:You may come from a country that has already bowed to your Islamic masters' feet,
That is the kind of Jurassic retort that gave rise to the arrogant and insensitive position that "if you are not with us you are against us". Now you are accusing Australians of being accommodative to terrorist and radical Islam. Why stop there? Why don't you extend your deranged pathology to include the idea of America attacking Australia, Britain, France, Germany, Japan, Italy because their citizens may have a different view of how the world should be organized.
0
Everton2
WhiteHawk: I have looked well beyond the marketing and keenly examined the record of the last 8 yrs, and it revealed an administration that has failed on just about every front. It has made America a point of comical retort across the globe.
This notion about America being hated because it's there is patently paranoid. It is informed by a singular view that America's ideas somehow has preeminence over all others, and any opposition or dissent must be interpreted as anti-American. The rest of the world matters and so are its views. It matters because we have all been affected by America's leadership ineptitude for the last 8yrs, and for the sake of a better approach I suspect that the world is in every sense supporting an Obama's Presidency.
Whatever you may think of Obama he could do no worst than the current President. At least we know his platform is to end the war in Iraq, be more consultative with others in the world, reform a health care system (if you can call it that) that is morally bankrupt in its application.
0
Alphaape
whitehawk, my comments were not directed towards you, but other posters. Gomen nasi.
0
Everton2
Alphaape- I wish all we had to contend with in relation to George Bush was his lack of experience.
0
Alphaape
Everton, Bush may have had a lack of experience, but he was smart enough to surround himself with smart people. Like it or not, not all of the US's problems stem from Bush. The path to 9/11 was started well before Bush came into office. Just think about it, those guys had been in America a few years before the event happened. Bush was inagurated in Jan 2001. By that time, things were in motion that set those events to happen.
Could Bush have done a better job? I say yes. But, he is not alone. The UN, had over an 13 year period with Iraq constantly watch them violate the resolutions set against them and did nothing. Kofi Anan and his son profited from those sanctions as well as many others, namely from the Oil for Food program. Sure Bush pushed some of the contracts to his buddies, just the same as the Democrats. When Nancy Pelosi claimed that when the House and Senate became Dem majority, that they would start making swift changes in energy and the economy. What did they do? Nothing, about as effective as the "Contract with America" back in the 90's.
Obama has named a search comittee for his VP nominee. All ready, people are up in arms about that because one of the persons, Howard I believe is his name, was on President Clinton's pardon comittee that pardon Mark Rich, you know, the one whole scamed at least $100 million dollars from investors by selling "old oil" as "new oil" (basically a shell game) flew the country , renounced his US citizenship, but was offered a full presidental pardon by Clinton. Not paying for his crimes and the people who got screwed in his shady dealings get nothing. So, if Obama can name a person like that to a key position to search for a VP, then I surmise that if he wins, politics will go on as normal, with the only change being that the far left will have more access to the White House and will start to push their agenda, for the good of us "unenlightend masses."
0
cleo
Pity he listened to the clots and vested interests instead. (Wot smart people? Anyone really smart would be smart enough to stay well away from the War Prezzidunce)
0
Alphaape
cleo, well what does that make Obama. He is friends with a guy who tried to blow up the Pentagon and New York police officers. I am black, have gone to a black church all of my life, and never have any ministers in the pulpit denounced America. Sure they have talked about society in generals sinful ways, but never to the point where it was all America's fault. And these were guys who grew up in the midst of deep south jim crow times. And the rest of the people that claim to be Obama supporters.
So cleo, before you go calling "W" a Prezzidunce, please research and get your facts straight. As I have said many times, I am not a 100% Bush guy, and admit he is wrong on many occasions. But it takes more than a dummy to graduate from Yale. And if he is truly dumb, he did a good job of making a way for himself outside of his daddy's help.
0
Sarge
Alpha - Who's the guy Obama's friends with who tried to blow up the Pentagon and NY cops?
0
cleo
Alphaape -
I don't understand your question. What GWB did or did not do doesn't make Obama anything. Neither does anything that Obama does nor does not do make GWB any less of a Prezzidunce - George did that all by himself.
You're wasting your time asking me to defend Obama (if that's what you're doing). I don't support him. But whoever moves into the White House next January would have to work very, very hard to be as bad as Bush.
0
Sarge
Cleo - You say you don't support Obama. But certainly you don't support McCain either, right? This is ( and it usually is, isn't it? ) a case of choosing the lesser of the two evils - pick one! ( your pick has to be Obama - he's the only major candidate who opposed the liberation of Iraq from the beginning )
0
cleo
Sarge -
What would be the point of me picking either? It's not like I get to vote.
I'll be happy enough if whichever muppet that does become the next resident of the White House doesn't go around starting illegal wars and messing in the politics of other countries.
0
Alphaape
cleo, I am curious, what world leader do you think is doing "a heck of a job" like Brownie after Katrina? I can probably gues but I leave that up to you to fill me in.
Sarge, the friend of Obama that was part of the Weather Underground is a man named Ayers, who is now a professor at a small college in Chicago, and he and Obama served together on many community activities in Chicago.
Like you, I believe this year is really a choice between the "lesser of two evils" for either Obama or McCain.
What many here don't get, yes Bush can push a lot of things, but it takes Congress to back him up. With the War Powers Act, the President only has a limited amount of time (90 days I think) to deploy troops in hostile combat without a declaration of war. But, Congress passed the Iraq resolution (both Dems and Rep.) and so there is a lot of blame to go around.
0
cleo
Alphaape -
You mean 'a heck of a job like Brownie' as in making a total pig's ear of things? .....Where to start, the list is so long.....
As for which world leader is doing a 'heck of a job' in the true sense, ...let me see, there's....er......er......er........
...er....
I give up. You got me.
:-(
0
WhiteHawk
Everton2, look beyond the past 8 years. Specifically, look at January 21, 1977 to January 19, 1980. Voting for Obama is voting to bring back that administration.
Ineptitude? Beyond your wildest fears...
Back to top